A 450 inch engine with standard ports will typically have a torque peak at less than 5000 rpm. So if you're shifting at 7000 you are probably way past the power peak.

Going with MW ports would raise the torque peak by about 1200 rpm and consequently give you more power. A 7000 rpm shift point would seem in the ballpark with MW heads, maybe even a little higher.

I still think the cam is way too big for the rest of the combination. The port window is telling the engine that the torque peak should happen at 4500 rpm and the cam is telling the engine that the torque peak should happen at 6000 rpm. So at 4500 rpm the port flow is happy but you have an EGR effect due to the long duration. At 6000 rpm the cam is happy but the small port window keeps the air from moving.

There are tricks that the class racers do to get around a mismatch like this, but there isn't any reason for you to do all that work. If you want to go faster then pull the heads and have them ported to MW size. Otherwise get with Dwayne or Brian or someone like that and sort out a cam that works matches your port size. If the torque peak is 4500 rpm then change the gears to suit.

You could also put the .590 back in to see what happens. I bet the car would be faster. But putting the .590 back in probably is a pain since you would need different springs and pushrods and lifters. It would most likely be less expensive to just put a smaller roller cam in there. That is usually only $300 or so.

Are these the newer style (heart shaped chambers)?
If you can remove your headers, and look in the ex. ports you will see a fuel trail on the floor of the port. If it's wide, like more than 3/8" then the cam is wasting too much intake charge out the exhaust.

With that compression you really need a MW port. Even at altitude!
Try lashing the cam hard, like .035 hot and see if it picks up any e.t. or mph.
I think your intake tract is too small for what your doing and the cam is a bit wrong, but not horrible.
Brian

Are you sure the Compression ratio is 15.3.Was the head cc checked .dome volume fluid checked .gasket ccs and deck height checked.Cam is wrong,the heads have the potential to make good power,Flow numbers and crossectional areas of the head and manifold would help in diagnosis .Bill C.

These are the numbers used for calculating compression: Bore is 4.36, stroke is 3.75, deck heighth of piston is 0, gasket is .040, combustion chamber is 75CC, piston dome is 21CC. Maybe someone can check the math--it wouldn't be the first mistake I've made!

The new heads increased the flow but changed the velocity of the flow. The dual pattern cam did not help.

The heads is not in question, they should be a pick up over his 915 !
The heads will like to be run at a higher rpm package than what he has ran before, maybe as much as 1100 more rpm .
the bigger the port the more air that is there you have to move, That air ,The cam is not one that I would have picked, even if it was laying around,
The '590' maybe a little better 'choice' with the 1.6 rockers, having said that,, think I would call my cam maker, say this is what I have , and know!
what is better with the combo I have run ?

A 287 at .050 cam slows my 512" 1.5-2 tenths from a cam that is 274 at .050..... My opinion change cam.

I did go to the Comp Cams website on Thursday and filled out the camshaft recommendation form, but have not gotten a reply back yet. A side note: I noticed that valve lash changes .008 to.010 from cold to hot with the aluminum heads.

IT'S NOT THE HEADS!

Did u try adding some jet to the carb?

that cam is actually fairly typical for a std port window 440-ish sized motor in a lite bracket car.
although, its not what i would have recommended for the elevation you race at.
a little less duration, and a little wider lsa to help try and keep some of that precious air in the motor so you can get some work out of it.

those lobes will want a fair amount of spring pressure to maintain full control of the valvetrain with 1.6 rockers and 7200+ type of rpms.
i'd say at least 250 seat/650 open as a minimum.

all that being said, i dont think theres going to be any cam thats going to end up being some "silver bullet" type of cure.

if they are the newer version heads, i thought i saw where Brain said the low lift numbers were a bit soft OOTB.

i would see if you could borrow a dominator from a friend and see what that does.

Here's an update to my setup as of 03/2013: I moved the cam centerline from 106 to 111. Re-installed the 4:30 rear gears, and went to larger jets in the 850 Holley carb (79s primary, with PV, and 88s in the secondaries, wanted 80s in the pri side, but didn't have them with me). In Phoenix,with DAs in the 1000' range, and 1.82 sec on the throttle stop, the car netted 154 MPH on a couple passes--7 MPH more than previous best. BTW, lost 1st round at the AZ Nationals, lost 1st round at the divisional event, went to the 3rd round at the regional event.

congrats

Sounds like it came around for ya........... NICE........

not to hijack but i have a similiar experience with installing a small roller with almost exact same specs. went from a mopar .620 cam with 1.6 rockers to a cam dynamics .660 same specs as op. changes were to new springs, 1.5 rockers, and pushrods for length. i installed it at 106 as called for on cam card as i didnt check p/v clearance at different installed c/l. i netted no change at all. car has been fastest with the old comp cam .650 cam installed at 101 c/l. that cam has 290@.050, go figure.